Skip to main content

About this Show

[untitled]

NETWORK

DURATION
00:30:00

RATING

SCANNED IN
San Francisco, CA, USA

SOURCE
Comcast Cable

TUNER
Channel 89 (615 MHz)

VIDEO CODEC
mpeg2video

AUDIO CODEC
ac3

PIXEL WIDTH
544

PIXEL HEIGHT
480

TOPIC FREQUENCY

Us 3, Sugaya 2, The City 2, Fong 1, Yasir 1, Antonini 1, Moore 1, Dr Requester 1,
Borrow a DVD
of this show
  SFGTV2    [untitled]  

    December 20, 2012
    5:30 - 6:00pm PST  

5:30pm
submitted. >> thank you. are there any other speakers in favor of the project sponsor? >> dear commissioners and president, yasir and i are husband and wife. we are working parents. we have four children. so i hope this actually works. it's on my iphone. we have four children. our oldest son is right now attending city college and taking courses from there. we have two daughters going to city public elementary school. and we have a little boy who is 4 years old going to preschool and if we stay in the city, he will be going to the same school as our daughters. so we have been renting in the city for ten years. last year, around this time of year we bought 27-29 sutro with
5:31pm
the hope that we can build a home for ourselves and to raise a family in the city. as property owners we understand the requirement when we purchased the two units that we have to maintain the number of units and cannot combine them and cannot reduce footage. so we worked with the architects to meet the city requirements. we are the new family on the block and don't want to be in conflict with our neighbors and we're putting in tremendous time and effort and money to address neighbors' requests to the point that nothing we can do to make the project viable. if you can see the plans is not to build a luxury home, to indulge ourselves, but simply to be the family of two parents
5:32pm
and four children, so we can grow as a family and raise our children in the family and maybe we can finally give our children the dog they wanted for so many years because as a renter, you cannot even have a pet. this has been an emotionally and financially draining process for us. i just hope and i trust the commissioners can judge our case by the facts, and assure us when we followed the requirements, followed the rules, followed the process, did everything that we could, that there is an end to this and there is a justice to the end. and the process is not being abused. thank you is all for me. thank you. i really appreciate you staying so late and taking this case. we have been waiting this for days. >> thank you. any other speakers in favor of the project sponsor? okay, dr
5:33pm
requester you have a two-minute rebuttal. >> thank you. i think what we need to look at here are the decks. and the staircase. the staircase that walks right up and looks into the ramblin's back patio. the decks that have nothing to do with living space. and nothing to do with whether or not the proponent will have space for their family. they want to put decks with glass railings. what they want -- what they are doing is early creating a nice little spa-like environment that allows them to peer into the privacy of their windows. they look into bathroom windows and bedroom windows and have a facade around the top of the
5:34pm
building that is not necessary and shades an area that now has saxon saxon solar panels. assume threat of of the -- assume that the rest of the neighbors want do the same thing, what happens to that mid-block space? it goes away. if everybody starts doing this and suddenly as i say the open space goes away, if everyone decides that they need to have decks on their back, with glass railings, then there is going to be no privacy for anyone whatsoever. thank you >> thank you. project sponsor you have a 2-minute rebuttal. >> >> thank you.
5:35pm
president fong and commissioners, i will be very brief. objective third party planning department has looked into this and they don't see anyway extraordinary privacy issues. they spent their time looking at the drawings and they did not see those privacy issues that the dr requester is mentioning. with regarding to the solar panels, they weren't there -- they added them after we proposed the project. and didn't take into consideration the project regardless at our own expense, at the request of the dr requester, we did a solar study. the reason why you are not hearing mention of the solar study because it clearly shows that it doesn't shade their panels, regardless of the fact that they used them as leverage against us to say we don't want
5:36pm
this. and finally with regards to the stairs looking in, it would be remarkable to be able to look into a slanted bay window with the stairs. these are issues beg brought up now. there was six months of silence from the dr requester where we continually asked them to talk to us and they didn't. thank you. >> thank you. >> okay. the public hearing is closed. and opening up to commissioners, with comments and questions, commissioner sugaya? >> just on the privacy issue, i don't think people stand around on decks to look into bedroom windows.
5:37pm
i'm sorry. i live in a condo, across the street from me, there are bedroom windows. you know, i don't think people in my condo building stand there and try to look in other people's windows. i suppose if you are having coffee or having a drink or something, you know, you might glance around and there is that kind of thing, but i don't think that most people on these kinds of decks. this is a family. it's like -- it's just not going to happen. i don't consider that to be an extraordinary circumstance. >> commissioner antonini? >> i would agree with commissioner sugaya. i know in "rear window," there this was a lot of that activity
5:38pm
in that building being a hitchcock movie. this is different, because the people on the decks would have to turn, instead of looking at the garden and green space, actually look back to their east and to the east windows and again, we're in a city that people are always going to have windows. i don't see any other impacts. the dr request's home is the one that goes furthest into the open space as far as this project is concerned. so i don't see anything unusual or extraordinary in this project. >> commissioner moore? >> move to approve. >> second. >> i'm sorry, the proper wording is not take dr and approve >> commissioners on that motion to not take dr and approve the project as proposed. (roll call ) so moved
5:39pm
commissioners. that motion passes unanimously, 7-0. and puts you on your final item on your calendar, public comment -- have i have no speaker cards. >> is there any general public comment? if not, it's been a good year. >> thank you. >> it's been very productive. thank you everyone. and we'll see you next year. >> thank you. meeting adjourned. [ gavel ]
5:40pm
5:41pm
5:42pm
5:43pm
5:44pm
5:45pm
5:46pm
5:47pm
5:48pm
5:49pm
5:50pm
5:51pm
5:52pm
5:53pm
5:54pm
5:55pm
5:56pm
5:57pm
5:58pm
5:59pm

Terms of Use (31 Dec 2014)